and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter [#permalink]
16 Sep 2013, 22:49

1

This post wasBOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

89%(01:58) correct
11%(01:07) wrong based on 424 sessions

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice QuestionQuestion No.: 1Page: 116Difficulty:

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below?Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fi res caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..

(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted(B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children(C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents(D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old(E) approximately 5,000 fi res per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required

Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter [#permalink]
17 Sep 2013, 14:00

5

This post receivedKUDOS

Expert's post

honchos wrote:

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below?Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..

(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted(B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children(C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents(D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old(E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required

There's not really a quick-fix strategy for these, other than critical thinking and careful reading. One thing that helps is paying attention to all the "logic" words of the argument: "therefore", "since", "because", "although", etc.

Here' the last, incomplete sentence of that argument:Butthis change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters,becausechildren given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety leversand ………..I've highlighted the "logic" words. The initial "but" indicates a sharp contrast with the previous sentence, and this is consistent with content. First sentence --- manufacturers try to solve a problem by introducing safety levers --- then contrast --- BUT, this doesn't solve the problem.

Then we get the "because", and then reason #1, and then the word "and", which indicates we need another, parallel reason --- that is to say, another reason why introducing safety levers to lighters will NOT solve the problem of children playing with them & starting fires. Which answer choice could be another reason why introducing the safety levers will not solve the problem of kids playing with fire & burning houses down? (A) economic, irrelevant(B) this could be an additional reason, that would work well with reason #1(C) has nothing to do with the introduction of safety levers(D) the opposite of what we want, something that makes the lighters with safety levers more safe(E) data from before safety levers were introduced, irrelevant

Pay attention to logic words always in GMAT CR. These subtle "signposts" make all the different in the flow of the argument, and in "complete the argument" CR questions, they are absolutely crucial for identifying precisely what you need in the blank.

Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter [#permalink]
17 Sep 2013, 14:48

Expert's post

mikemcgarry wrote:

honchos wrote:

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below?Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..

(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted(B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children(C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents(D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old(E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required

There's not really a quick-fix strategy for these, other than critical thinking and careful reading. One thing that helps is paying attention to all the "logic" words of the argument: "therefore", "since", "because", "although", etc.

Here' the last, incomplete sentence of that argument:Butthis change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters,becausechildren given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety leversand ………..I've highlighted the "logic" words. The initial "but" indicates a sharp contrast with the previous sentence, and this is consistent with content. First sentence --- manufacturers try to solve a problem by introducing safety levers --- then contrast --- BUT, this doesn't solve the problem.

Then we get the "because", and then reason #1, and then the word "and", which indicates we need another, parallel reason --- that is to say, another reason why introducing safety levers to lighters will NOT solve the problem of children playing with them & starting fires. Which answer choice could be another reason why introducing the safety levers will not solve the problem of kids playing with fire & burning houses down? (A) economic, irrelevant(B) this could be an additional reason, that would work well with reason #1(C) has nothing to do with the introduction of safety levers(D) the opposite of what we want, something that makes the lighters with safety levers more safe(E) data from before safety levers were introduced, irrelevant

Pay attention to logic words always in GMAT CR. These subtle "signposts" make all the different in the flow of the argument, and in "complete the argument" CR questions, they are absolutely crucial for identifying precisely what you need in the blank.

Does this make sense?Mike

It is a long time I do not do simil.ar reasoning for a question. Maybe because my mind goes in auto mode :D _________________

Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter [#permalink]
19 Sep 2013, 01:26

mikemcgarry wrote:

honchos wrote:

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below?Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..

(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted(B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children(C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents(D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old(E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required

There's not really a quick-fix strategy for these, other than critical thinking and careful reading. One thing that helps is paying attention to all the "logic" words of the argument: "therefore", "since", "because", "although", etc.

Here' the last, incomplete sentence of that argument:Butthis change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters,becausechildren given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety leversand ………..I've highlighted the "logic" words. The initial "but" indicates a sharp contrast with the previous sentence, and this is consistent with content. First sentence --- manufacturers try to solve a problem by introducing safety levers --- then contrast --- BUT, this doesn't solve the problem.

Then we get the "because", and then reason #1, and then the word "and", which indicates we need another, parallel reason --- that is to say, another reason why introducing safety levers to lighters will NOT solve the problem of children playing with them & starting fires. Which answer choice could be another reason why introducing the safety levers will not solve the problem of kids playing with fire & burning houses down? (A) economic, irrelevant(B) this could be an additional reason, that would work well with reason #1(C) has nothing to do with the introduction of safety levers(D) the opposite of what we want, something that makes the lighters with safety levers more safe(E) data from before safety levers were introduced, irrelevant

Pay attention to logic words always in GMAT CR. These subtle "signposts" make all the different in the flow of the argument, and in "complete the argument" CR questions, they are absolutely crucial for identifying precisely what you need in the blank.

Does this make sense?Mike

Thanks Mike, Bunuel, You and Karishma(From Veritas) has made Gmatclub.com into heaven for Gmat preparation. It is always encouraging when you guys immediately respond to personal requests, actually i was able to get to the correct answer, but your explanation has helped me to visualize the problem with a different perspective. _________________

Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter [#permalink]
19 Sep 2013, 10:04

Expert's post

1

This post wasBOOKMARKED

This question is asking for an additional reason why the safety levers are unlikely to result in a reduction of the fires caused by children. The argument already provides one reason - that the children can figure out the safety levers so now we need to make it more likely that they will be able to start fires. Answer choice B says that not only will they be able to work the lighters but also will have access to the lighters - therefore the safety levers will make little difference in the number of fires. Answer A only talks about expense which does not relate to the likelihood of firesAnswer C does not address stopping children from starting fires, only that the fires can be quickly extinguishedAnswer D actually goes opposite of the argument, showing that there could be a reduction because children under 2 could not start fires.Answer E only tells us the number of fires, does not discuss whether children will be able to start the fires.

honchos wrote:

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below?Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fi res caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..

(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted(B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children(C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents(D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old(E) approximately 5,000 fi res per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required

What is the stratregy for solving such question types.

_________________

Special offer! Save $250 on GMAT Ultimate Classroom, GMAT Small Group Instruction, or GMAT Liveonline when you use the promo code GCVERBAL250. Or, save $150 on GMAT Self-Prep when you use the code GCVERBAL150. Enroll at www.princetonreview.com

Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter [#permalink]
21 Sep 2014, 20:11

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

gmatclubot

Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighter
[#permalink]
21 Sep 2014, 20:11